Live data from Hacker News

An update on Mozilla's terms of use for Firefox

blog.mozilla.org

121–130 of 381 posts

Re: An update on Mozilla's terms of use for Firefox

#121
post #99

The one thing I haven't seen in any of these threads is where privacy-conscious users are supposed to go now. Are there any viable alternatives to Firefox?

Maybe Orion, if you trust Kagi enough? https://kagi.com/orion/ It's webkit-based, and you can pay for it ($150 for a lifetime license).

Actually, I just tried it for a bit, but I can't recommend this right now. It crashed several times in the hour I was using it. Very unstable, along with a host of other bugs. Seems like an early alpha/beta.

Re: An update on Mozilla's terms of use for Firefox

#122
post #103
post #99

The one thing I haven't seen in any of these threads is where privacy-conscious users are supposed to go now. Are there any viable alternatives to Firefox?

We just had a thread on Ladybird that seemed positive, but I haven't tried it and so don't know what it's like as a browser. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43200604

It's in a pre-alpha state and nowhere near ready yet :(

Re: An update on Mozilla's terms of use for Firefox

#123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. Some people want Sync, Pocket, oneline translation, etc. Others like me just want a browser. There should be a simple option to choose between a browser and some multifunction beast that some people and even more managers at Mozilla are dreaming of.

Those things are Mozilla services. If they spoke of operating Mozilla services and data you input into Mozilla services, it'd be fine and expected. But instead they speak of operating Firefox and data input into Firefox, which is much more broad, and just happens to give them coverage for all kinds of data collection and abuse. The fact they've issued this update and not clarified the scope as Mozilla services is dis…

Thanks for the terminology clarification. So ideally the services would be used by an extension that users are offered to download. Next best would be a simple choice do you want any services or not. If yes, all of them or customize.

Re: An update on Mozilla's terms of use for Firefox

#127

How many times have we seen this ploy? First you have a nice policy, then you change it to something extreme that causes outrage, then you walk back most of the change saying you had legal or whatever baloney reasons to make the change in the first place and somehow couldn't wordsmith the language well enough the first time. I don't buy it. I hope some day business schools begin teaching that this ploy is a very bad…

In this instance, they haven’t walked anything back yet: rather, they’re trying to explain why they’ve done what they’ve done, why it isn’t as bad as it looks but is just a matter of others using the wrong definitions… and then demonstrating that it’s them that have the wrong definition after all, and it is exactly as bad as it looks. And that the Mozilla of even ten years ago wouldn’t have been in this bind.

Re: An update on Mozilla's terms of use for Firefox

#128
post #34

While I agree with folks that this is a step backwards in privacy, I think it’s a good exercise to zoom out and understand Firefox’s position. The browser market is highly competitive, and Mozilla’s competitors have orders of magnitude more resources at their disposal. As we all know Firefox’s market share has been dropping over the past years and unfortunately the revenue supporting all of Mozilla comes predominantl…

It doesn’t help that they make it hard to donate to a specific product’s development. I’d donate to Firefox. I wouldn’t give a penny to anything of their other distractions. (And others would support exactly the opposite, I’m sure. But no one gets to sponsor what they personally care about.)

(Would others? I don't think I have ever seen anyone defend that part of the equation. With Wikipedia's similar insanity--begging for donations to keep their servers on when they don't spend the money on that--I have at least seen some people who like what they do spend their money on as important to them, but I don't think I have ever seen anyone actively want to donate money to Firefox's random side projects instead of Firefox.)

Re: An update on Mozilla's terms of use for Firefox

#129
post #34

While I agree with folks that this is a step backwards in privacy, I think it’s a good exercise to zoom out and understand Firefox’s position. The browser market is highly competitive, and Mozilla’s competitors have orders of magnitude more resources at their disposal. As we all know Firefox’s market share has been dropping over the past years and unfortunately the revenue supporting all of Mozilla comes predominantl…

I wonder how much success would have some subscription option (at least for small amount) like maybe $5 per year?

would that be more than my data are worth?

I really like Firefox and u would like it to improve over time and as this is one of my main tools for my work I could consider to spend a little on it

Re: An update on Mozilla's terms of use for Firefox

#130
> It also includes a nonexclusive, royalty-free, worldwide license for the purpose of doing as you request with the content you input in Firefox.

Do I understand it correctly that they can now use everything I read or type in the browser as they please, including for AI training?

Considering that I do most of my work in webbased enail, issue tracker and other internal tools, this sounds like a direct violation of my NDA.

Post reply on HN